FOR TEACHERS ONLY
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
GRADE 5
ELEMENTARY-LEVEL
SOCIAL STUDIES TEST
RATING GUIDE
BOOKLET 2
DOCUMENT-BASED QUESTION (DBQ)
NOVEMBER 13, 2008
Updated information regarding the rating of this examination may be posted on the New York State
Education Department’s web site during the rating period. Visit the site http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa/
and select the link “Examination Scoring Information” for any recently posted information regarding
this examination. This site should be checked before the rating process for this examination begins and
at least one more time before the final scores for the examination are recorded.
Contents of the Rating Guide
For Part III A (scaffold questions):
• A question-specific rubric
For Part III B (DBQ) essays:
• A content-specific rubric
• Prescored anchor papers. Score levels 4 and 1 have two papers each, score levels 3 and 2 have three papers
each. They are ordered by score level from high to low.
• Commentary explaining the specific score awarded to each paper
• Five prescored practice papers with scoring commentaries
Copyright 2008
The University of the State of New York
THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Albany, New York 12234
Mechanics of Rating
The following procedures are to be used in rating papers for this test. More detailed directions for
the organization of the rating process and procedures for rating the examination are included in the
Grade 5 Elementary-Level Social Studies Test, Manual for Administrators and Teachers. The 2008
edition of the test manual can be found at www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa/elintsocst.html. Click on the
manual under Grade 5.
Rating the Part III B Essay Question
(1) Follow your school’s procedures for training raters. This process should include:
Introduction to the task—
• Raters read the task
• Raters identify the answers to the task
• Raters discuss possible answers and summarize expectations for student responses
Introduction to the specific rubric and anchor papers—
• Trainer leads review of specific rubric with reference to the task
• Trainer reviews procedures for assigning holistic scores, i.e., by matching evidence from the
response to the rubric
• Trainer leads review of each anchor paper and commentary
Practice scoring individually—
• Raters score a set of papers independently without looking at the scores and commentaries
provided
• Trainer records scores and leads discussion until the raters feel confident enough to move on to
actual rating
(2) When actual rating begins, each rater should record his or her individual rating for a student’s
essay on the rating sheet provided, not directly on the student’s essay or answer sheet. The rater
should not correct the student’s work by making insertions or changes of any kind.
(3) Each essay must be rated by at least two raters; a third rater will be necessary to resolve scores that
differ by more than one point. Do not round up essay scores.
Rating the Part III A (Scaffold) Questions
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Follow a similar procedure for training raters.
The scaffold questions need only be scored by one rater.
The scores for each scaffold question may be recorded in the student’s test booklet.
Each correct response in Part III A has a score of 0.5.
If the total Part III A score ends in .5, round up to the nearest whole number before recording the
total Part III A score.
The scoring coordinator will be responsible for organizing the movement of papers, calculating a
final score for each student’s essay, recording that score on the student’s Part I answer sheet or on the
last page of test booklet 2, and determining the student’s final test score. The conversion chart for this
test is located on the Department’s web site http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa/. Only the chart for the
November 2008 test may be used for determining the final test score.
[2]
Grade 5 Elementary-Level Social Studies
Part III A—Content-Specific Rubric
Short-Answer Questions
November 2008
Scoring Notes:
1. Correct responses in Part III A are awarded credit. The maximum number of credits for this
part of the test is 6.
2. If a student's total credits for Part III A ends in 0.5, round up to the nearest whole number.
For example, if the total credit is 4.5, round up to 5 and place that score on the student’s Part I
answer sheet or on page 10 of test booklet 2 and on the back cover of test booklet 2.
Document 1
Areas of Dutch Settlement in New York
N
W
E
S
awk Rive
r
Fort Orange
(Albany)
Hudson Ri
v
er
M oh
Approximate area of
Dutch settlement called
New Netherland
Present-day border
New Amsterdam
(New York City)
Atlantic
Ocean
Source: New York State Activity Book, Harcourt Brace and Company (adapted)
New Amsterdam was located at the tip of Manhattan Island.
It was part of the larger Dutch colony of New Netherland.
New Netherland was established and controlled by the
Dutch West India Company. The Dutch West India Company
needed a strong leader who could run the colony. They hired
Peter Stuyvesant as director-general [governor] of the colony
of New Netherland in 1647.
[3]
Question 1a What was the name of the original Dutch colony that later became part of New York
State?
Score of 0.5:
• States that New Netherland was the name of the original Dutch colony
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples New Amsterdam; Manhattan; Manhattan Island; Dutch West India Company; Fort
Orange; New York City; Albany; Amsterdam
• Vague response
Example: Dutch settlement; Netherland(s)
• No response
Question 1b What was the name of the original Dutch town that later became New York City?
Score of 0.5:
• States that New Amsterdam was the name of the original Dutch town
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: Fort Orange; Albany; New Netherland; New York City; Manhattan
• Vague response
Examples: Dutch settlement; Amsterdam
• No response
Question 1c Which job was Peter Stuyvesant hired for by the Dutch West India Company?
Score of 0.5:
• States that Peter Stuyvesant was hired as director-general or governor or leader of the colony
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: Dutch West India Company; mayor
• Vague response
Examples: director; general
• No response
[4]
Document 2
. . . When the new governor [Peter Stuyvesant] arrived in New
Amsterdam in 1647 with his wife, his recently widowed sister,
and her three children, he was horrified. Instead of streets of
gold—as he expected—he saw mud. The walls of Fort
Amsterdam were used as grazing fields for a couple of cows.
Chickens made their nests under the mouths of the fort’s rusty
cannons. Of the three windmills, one could no longer be used,
while a second one had burned down. The houses were clumsily
built of wood, with thatched roofs and wooden chimneys. The
town’s outhouses were set directly on the street, creating
unpleasant odors. Pigs wandered about at will, kept out of
vegetable gardens only by rough stockades. The church was
unfinished. There were 150 dwellings and one quarter of them
were taverns. There was drunkenness and fighting in the
streets, even on the Sabbath [day of worship] which was
supposed to be a day of quiet and prayer. Stuyvesant had a lot
to do. . . .
Question 2 List three problems Peter Stuyvesant found when he arrived in New Amsterdam.
Score of 1.5, 1.0, or 0.5
• Award credit (up to a maximum of 1 credits) for each different problem that Peter Stuyvesant
found when he arrived in the Dutch colony
Examples: streets were mud; walls of Fort Amsterdam were used as grazing fields for cows;
chicken nests under mouths of rusty cannons; rusty cannons; windmill could not be
used; windmill burned down; houses were clumsily built/poorly built houses; thatched
roofs and wooden chimneys; outhouses built on the street/sewage problems; unpleasant
odors; wandering pigs/wandering animals; unfinished church; one quarter of the 150
dwellings were taverns/too many taverns; drunkenness and fighting in the
street/drunkenness and fighting on the Sabbath
Note: To receive maximum credit, three different problems found by Stuyvesant must be stated. For
example, streets were mud and muddy streets are the same problem stated in different words. In
this and similar cases, award credit for each accurate and different answer.
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: recently widowed sister; Sabbath was supposed to be a day of quiet; streets not made of
gold; vegetable gardens
• Vague response
Examples: grazing fields; he was horrified; stockades; housing; disorder; chicken nests; cannons
• No response
[5]
Document 3
. . . Peter set to work. He told the people what they could and
could not do. He closed the taverns at nine o’clock every evening.
He fined people for fighting in the streets. He said that pigs
must be kept behind fences, and that outhouses must be
removed from the streets.
Walking along the streets of New Amsterdam was dangerous
because people drove their carts and horses too fast. Peter made
a new law. He said the drivers must get down from their carts
and lead their horses. They could only ride through town on the
street now called Broadway. Even on Broadway, he set a speed
limit. . . .
Source: Joan Banks, Peter Stuyvesant, Chelsea House Publishers, 2000
Question 3 Based on this document, list two changes Peter Stuyvesant made that helped the town.
Score of 1.0 or 0.5
• Award credit (up to a maximum of 1 credit) for each different change Peter Stuyvesant made
Examples: closed taverns at 9 o’clock/closed taverns earlier; fined people for fighting in the
streets; said pigs must be kept behind fences/told people animals needed to be
controlled; outhouses must be removed from the streets; drivers must lead their
horses/walk their horses through the street; drivers could only ride through town on
Broadway; set a speed limit on Broadway
Note: To receive maximum credit, two different changes made by Peter Stuyvesant must be stated. For
example, people were fined for fighting and fines were given for street fighting are the same
change stated in different words. In this and similar cases, award only credit for this question.
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: fighting in the street; Peter set to work; walking along the streets
• Vague response
Examples: made a new law; they can only be on Broadway; drivers had to lead their carts; he
made the town better
• No response
[6]
Document 4
Peter Stuyvesant passed laws to improve life in New
Amsterdam. Fires were a problem. The people were told to get
rid of thatched roofs, wooden chimneys, and haystacks because
they could cause fires. He appointed fire wardens to check to be
sure the fire laws were being followed. Buckets were filled with
water to put on the fires. A tax of one beaver skin was used to
pay for the buckets. This was how Peter Stuyvesant created the
first fire department in America.
While Stuyvesant was governor, the town built a hospital and
a post office. A home was set up for orphans. A school was built
so that students did not have to go to classes in one of the
taverns.
Question 4 List two ways that Peter Stuyvesant improved the living conditions in New Amsterdam.
Score of 1.0 or 0.5:
• Award credit (up to a maximum of 1 credit) for each different way Peter Stuyvesant improved the
living conditions in New Amsterdam
Examples: told people to get rid of thatched roofs/wooden chimneys/hay stacks; appointed fire
wardens; buckets were filled with water in case of fire; created the first fire department;
built a hospital; built a post office; set up a home for orphans; built a school; charged a
tax of one beaver skin to pay for the fire buckets
Note: To receive maximum credit, two different improvements in living conditions made by Stuyvesant
must be stated. For example, built schools and improved education are the same improvement
stated in different words. Likewise, built buildings and built a hospital are the same improvement
since built a hospital is a subset of built buildings. In these and similar cases, award only credit
for this question.
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: improved life in New Amsterdam; students did not have to go to school; kids went to
school in taverns
• Vague response
Examples: used water buckets; charged a tax; thatched roof; wooden chimney; haystacks
• No response
[7]
Document 5
In 1653, war broke out between England and Holland.
Stuyvesant met with his council to make plans to defend New
Amsterdam. They agreed that repairs needed to be made to the
fort. A wall was built along the northern edge of the town. The
wall was made of wood. It was twelve feet high and had a
sloping platform where guards could watch for enemies. Patrols
of soldiers walked along the wall so often that they created a
path. Today that path is known as Wall Street.
Question 5 Name one action Peter Stuyvesant and his council took to defend New Amsterdam after
war broke out between England and Holland.
Score of 0.5:
• Names an action Peter Stuyvesant and his council took to defend New Amsterdam after war broke out
Examples: had repairs made to the fort; ordered a wall to be built; had a sloping platform built on
the wall where guards could watch for enemies; had soldiers patrol along the wall; had
guards watch for enemies; made plans to defend New Amsterdam
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: war broke out in 1653; today the path is known as Wall Street
• Vague response
Examples: repairs needed to be made; soldiers made a path; wooden wall
• No response
[8]
Document 6
. . . On October 4th, 1658 in New Amsterdam, the first police
force was organized. These policemen were also firemen as a
part of their job. Payment for their service was twenty-four
stivers (about 48 cents) per each night of duty. Each officer had
a musket, sword, and a pistol. He also carried a wooden rattle as
a noise maker to arouse [get] the public’s attention in the event
of a fire or police action. They also acted as town criers for the
time, weather and news. Some of the town people nick-named
them “Prowlers” as an expression of their disdain [dislike]. . . .
Source: Bernard McMahon, New Amsterdam 1626: Polly Bergen Letters, Columbia Publishing, 1992
Question 6 According to this document, what did Peter Stuyvesant do in 1658 to improve New
Amsterdam?
Score of 0.5:
• States what Peter Stuyvesant did in 1658 to improve New Amsterdam
Examples: organized/started/created a police force; made a police department; paid people to be
policemen; had policemen act as firemen/town criers; created a well-armed police
force; each officer had a musket, sword, pistol and wooden rattle
Score of 0:
• Incorrect response
Examples: used noise makers; had police make noise
• Vague response
Examples: officer; policemen; Prowlers; town crier
• No response
The maximum score for Part III A is 6.
[9]
Grade 5 Elementary-Level Social Studies
Part IIIB—Content Specific Rubric
Document-Based Question
November 2008
Historical Background:
In 1625, the Dutch founded New Amsterdam, later called New York City. The Dutch
controlled New Amsterdam for about 40 years, but they influenced culture in New York for
centuries. An important leader of New Amsterdam was Peter Stuyvesant.
Task: Write about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of New
Amsterdam
Scoring Notes:
1. The response to this document-based question should discuss at least two ways Peter Stuyvesant
improved life in the Dutch town of New Amsterdam; however, to incorporate the minimum
number of documents, most responses will discuss more than two ways.
2. Using separate or multiple pieces of information from a graphic and/or text found on the same page
constitutes the use of only one document.
[10]
Score of 4
•
•
•
•
Thoroughly develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch
town of New Amsterdam
Consistently includes accurate information from at least four documents; may include portions of the
documents that support specific points made in the essay
Provides supporting evidence related to the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of
New Amsterdam, using many relevant examples, reasons, and details; may include relevant outside
information
Demonstrates a logical and clear plan of organization, including a beginning (introduction), middle
(body), and ending (conclusion)
Score of 3
•
•
•
•
Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of New
Amsterdam
Includes accurate information from some of the documents; may include portions of the documents
that support specific points made in the essay
Provides supporting evidence, using some relevant examples, reasons, and details; may include some
minor inaccuracies
Demonstrates a general plan of organization; may lack an introduction or a conclusion
Score of 2
•
•
•
•
Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of New
Amsterdam
Includes limited information from the documents or consists primarily of relevant information copied
from the documents
Provides little supporting evidence, using few relevant examples, reasons, and details; may include
some inaccuracies
Demonstrates a weakness in organization (may go off the topic; may list information without tying it
together; may lack an introduction and/or a conclusion; may lack focus)
Score of 1
•
•
•
•
Minimally develops the task or shows a limited understanding of the task
Lacks information from the documents or makes vague or unclear references to the documents or
consists of relevant and irrelevant information copied from the documents
Provides little or no supporting evidence; may include inaccuracies
Lacks a plan of organization
Score of 0
Fails to develop the task; OR is totally unrelated to the topic; OR provides no accurate information; OR
includes only the historical background and/or task as copied from the test booklet; OR includes only
entire documents copied from the test booklet; OR is illegible; OR is a blank paper
[11]
Key Ideas from the Documents
Historical information about New Amsterdam and New Netherland
Document 1
New Amsterdam was part of the larger colony of New Netherland
Colony needed a strong leader
Stuyvesant was hired as director-general of colony of New Netherland
Conditions Peter Stuyvesant found when he arrived in New Amsterdam
Document 2
Document 3
Document 4
Streets were mud
Walls of Fort Amsterdam were used as grazing fields for cows
Chickens made nests under mouths of rusty cannons; cannons were rusty
One windmill could not be used; another windmill had burned down
Houses were clumsily built of wood
Houses had thatched roofs and wooden chimneys
Outhouses were built on the street and created unpleasant odors
Pigs wandered about at will
Church was unfinished
One quarter of the 150 dwellings were taverns/too many taverns
Drunkenness and fighting in the street occurred every day
Walking in the streets was dangerous because of the speed of carts and horses
Fires were a problem
Children went to school in a tavern
Ways that Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of New Amsterdam
Document 3
Document 4
Document 5
Document 6
Closed taverns at 9 o’clock every night
Fined people for fighting in the streets
Said pigs must be kept behind fences
Removed outhouses from the streets
Said drivers must get down from carts and lead their horses
Set a speed limit for drivers riding on carts on Broadway
Told people to get rid of thatched roofs/wooden chimneys/haystacks
Appointed fire wardens to be sure fire laws were followed
Filled buckets with water to put on fires
Bought fire buckets with tax money
Created the first fire department
Built a hospital/ post office/home for orphans/school
Made repairs to the fort
Built a wall along the northern edge of town
Built wall with a sloping platform for guards to watch for enemies
Had soldiers patrol along the wall
Organized first police force
Had policemen act as firemen
Had police use noisemakers to warn public in event of fire or police action
Had policemen act as town criers to provide the time, weather, and news
[12]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – A
[13]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – A
[14]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – A
[15]
Anchor Level 4-A
The response:
• Thoroughly develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the
Dutch town of New Amsterdam
• Consistently includes accurate information from documents 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides supporting evidence, using many relevant examples, reasons, and details (he set speed
limits because people were driving too fast; fined people for fighting in the streets; England and
Holland were at war, so Peter had to build a wall so New Amsterdam could be protected);
includes a minor error (people had to get out of cars)
• Demonstrates a logical and clear plan of organization, includes an introduction, body, and
conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 4. The response demonstrates a clear
understanding of the task by rephrasing facts in an organized manner. Description of the problems
found in the colony and the resulting improvements are integrated into a well-written response that
shows a logical progression of events.
[16]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – B
[17]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – B
[18]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 4 – B
Anchor Level 4-B
The response:
• Thoroughly develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the
Dutch town of New Amsterdam
• Consistently includes accurate information from documents 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides supporting evidence, using many relevant examples, reasons, and details (there were
drunks fighting so Peter closed taverns at nine o’clock and fined people who were fighting in
the streets; on Broadway, people were driving their wagons so fast Peter set a speed limit on
that street; there were many fire problems so Peter made a fire law saying to get rid of the
thatched roofs, and wooden chimneys, and haystacks because they could cause fires)
• Demonstrates a logical and clear plan of organization, includes an introduction, body, and
conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 4. The response addresses the task by
relating the improvements to the specific problems that Peter Stuyvesant found when he arrived in
the colony. Information in the essay is well written, rephrasing details and supporting evidence in
an original, sequential manner.
[19]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – A
[20]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – A
Anchor Level 3-A
The response:
• Develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of
New Amsterdam
• Includes accurate information from documents 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides supporting evidence, using some relevant examples (he made new laws: outhouses are
going to be moved back away from the streets; pigs have to be in fenced area; built hospitals and
post offices); includes minor inaccuracies (the people who fight have to be moved away from the
outhouses; police had machetes)
• Demonstrates a general plan of organization; lacks a formal introduction and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 3. The response shows an understanding
of the task. Although a list format is used, original wording ties the facts together. The introductory
statements that use information from the historical background offset the weak concluding statement.
[21]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – B
[22]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – B
[23]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – B
Anchor Level 3-B
The response:
• Develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes accurate information from documents 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
• Provides supporting evidence, using some relevant examples, reasons, and details (drunk people
fighting; closed the tavern at nine; got rid of wooden chimneys from houses so they would not
get on fire)
• Demonstrates a general plan of organization with an introduction, body, and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 3. The response includes some
supporting details that describe the poor conditions of New Amsterdam prior to the hiring of Peter
Stuyvesant, followed by examples of improvements that pertain to the task. These examples are
stated in a list format with some original wording to tie them to the task. Several overgeneralizations weaken this response.
[24]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – C
[25]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 3 – C
Anchor Level 3-C
The response:
• Develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of
New Amsterdam
• Includes accurate information from documents 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides some original supporting evidence (Peter Stuyvesant improved New Amsterdam by
making it healthy and clean); uses some relevant examples, reasons, and details (people had to
keep their pigs in pens; built a school for all of the town children; gave homes to the orphans);
includes an inaccuracy (England and Hollyland hated New Amsterdam)
• Demonstrates a general plan of organization; lacks an introduction and a conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 3. In this response, most of the facts are
accurate and stated in an original manner, but the essay lacks sufficient supporting detail for a higher
score level.
[26]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – A
[27]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – A
[28]
Anchor Level 2-A
The response:
• Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of
New Amsterdam
• Includes limited information from documents 1, 2, and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence (walls used as fields for some cows; fined people who were
fighting in the roads; created first fire department in America); includes several inaccuracies
(Dutch colony was named Peter Stuyvesant; actual name of New York City was Manhattan;
closed cabins at 9:00; he checked the wood)
• Demonstrates a weakness in organization, listing information without tying it together; includes
an introduction and a conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 2. The response lists some problems and
then minimally addresses some improvements that are mostly unrelated to the problems mentioned.
The inaccuracies and lack of continuity detract from this response.
[29]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – B
[30]
Anchor Level 2-B
The response:
• Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes limited information from documents 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence, using few relevant examples, reasons, and details (Peter
Stuyvesant put a speed limit on Broadway so no one can get hurt; made a police force that were
also firemen, news reporters, and weathermen)
• Demonstrates a weakness in organization; lacks an introduction and a conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 2. The response consists of a series of
accurate statements about some improvements that Peter Stuyvesant made to make life better in
New Amsterdam. These details are not tied together; however, they do show a limited
understanding of the task.
[31]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – C
[32]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – C
[33]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 2 – C
Anchor Level 2-C
The response:
• Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes limited information from the documents 2, 3, 4, and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence, using few relevant examples, reasons, and details (Peter
improved New Amsterdam by making laws, police forces, and firemen; outhouses had to be
removed from the streets)
• Demonstrates a weakness in organization, lacking a clear introduction and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 2. The response restates information
from documents without demonstrating a good understanding of the task. The response frequently
quotes document sources as document titles. Overall, the response lacks focus.
[34]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 1 – A
[35]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 1 – A
Anchor Level 1-A
The response:
• Shows a limited understanding of the task
• Makes vague references to documents 1, 2, and 5; includes accurate information from document 4
• Provides little supporting evidence (appointed fire wardens to make sure the fire laws were being
followed)
• Demonstrates a weakness in organization, listing information without tying it together
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 1. The response does not follow a logical
chronological sequence of events. The focus of the response is mainly on facts from the documents
that are irrelevant to the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved New Amsterdam.
[36]
Anchor Paper – Document–Based Essay—Level 1 – B
Anchor Level 1-B
The response:
• Minimally develops the task
• Makes vague or unclear references to documents 3 and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence (move outhouses away from the road); includes an inaccuracy
(refers to building a police station so the people had jobs to make money)
• Lacks a plan of organization
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 1. The lack of details from the
documents and the misinterpretation of document 6 indicate a very limited understanding of the task.
[37]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – A
[38]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – B
[39]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – B
[40]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – C
[41]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – D
[42]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – E
[43]
Document–Based Essay—Practice Paper – E
[44]
Practice Paper A—Score Level 2
The response:
• Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes limited information from the documents 4, 5, and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence, using few relevant examples, reasons, and details (Peter
Stuyvesant made the first fire department in America; made a school so kids did not have to go
to classes in one of the taverns)
• Demonstrates a general plan of organization; lacks a formal introduction and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 2. The response simply lists the ways
Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town of New Amsterdam with only a few supporting
details. The weak introductory statement is restated as the concluding statement.
Practice Paper B—Score Level 3
The response:
• Develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes accurate information from documents 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides supporting evidence, using some relevant examples, reasons, and details (Peter
Stuyvesant put pigs behind fences; made a speed limit; closed the taverns at 9 o’clock; he made
a wooden wall with guards on it to keep away the bad guys)
• Demonstrates a general plan of organization with a brief introduction and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 3. The response uses a list style format,
but includes enough supporting evidence to develop a satisfactory essay. The misspelling of some
words and the brief digression do not detract from the overall score.
[45]
Practice Paper C—Score Level 2
The response:
• Develops the task of writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the Dutch town
of New Amsterdam
• Includes limited information from documents 3, 4, 5, and 6
• Provides little supporting evidence, using few relevant examples, reasons, and details (made the
first police force; made a wall to protect them from enemies); includes a minor inaccuracy
(made the first fire station)
• Demonstrates a weakness in organization, lacking a formal introduction and conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 2. The response demonstrates some
understanding of the topic and uses limited information from the documents. However, the essay
does not have sufficient supporting detail for a higher score.
Practice Paper D—Score Level 0
The response:
Fails to develop the task
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 0. The response mentions Peter
Stuyvesant and New Amsterdam, but fails to address the task.
Practice Paper E—Score Level 4
The response:
• Thoroughly develops the task by writing about the ways Peter Stuyvesant improved life in the
Dutch town of New Amsterdam
• Consistently includes accurate information from documents 2, 3, 4, and 5
• Provides supporting evidence, using many relevant examples, reasons, and details (made new
laws: taverns were closed at nine o’clock, had a speed limit on Broadway, told people to get rid
of thatched roofs, wooden chimneys, and haystacks; built buildings: home for orphans, fire
station, schools, hospital, and post office; protected town; put a wall on the northern edge of
town with sloping platform so guards could watch for enemies)
• Demonstrates a logical and clear plan of organization; lacks a formal introduction and
conclusion
Conclusion: Overall, this response fits the criteria for Level 4. The response thoroughly develops
the task by categorizing the details and supporting evidence into a concise essay. It rephrases
information from the documents, resulting in a response that demonstrates a clear understanding of
the task. The weak introduction and conclusion do not detract from the overall quality of the essay.
[46]
Grade 5 Elementary-Level Social Studies
Descriptions of Performance Levels
Performance Level
Range of Final Scores
85-100
Descriptions
Shows evidence of superior understanding of the content,
the concepts, and the skills required for elementary-level
achievement in each of the learning standards and key ideas
assessed in social studies.
65-84
Shows evidence of superior ability to apply the social
studies content, concepts, and skills required for entering
intermediate-level academic environments.
Shows knowledge and understanding of the content, the
concepts, and the skills required for elementary-level
achievement of the five learning standards that are assessed
in social studies.
58-64
Shows the ability to apply the social studies content,
concepts, and skills required for entering intermediate-level
academic environments.
Shows only minimal knowledge and understanding of the
content, the concepts, and the skills required for elementarylevel achievement of the five learning standards that are
assessed in social studies.
0-57
Shows only minimal knowledge of the social studies
content, concepts, and skills required for entering
intermediate-level academic environments.
Is unable to show proficiency in understanding the content,
the concepts, and the skills required for elementary-level
achievement in any or most of the learning standards and
key ideas assessed in social studies.
4
Meeting the
Standards with
Distinction
3
Meeting the
Standards
2
Not Fully Meeting
the Standards
1
Not Meeting the
Standards
Is unable to show evidence of an ability to apply the social
studies content, concepts, and skills required for entering
intermediate-level academic environments.
Part III
Specifications Chart for Document-Based Question
TOPIC
Conditions Peter Stuyvesant found in New
Amsterdam and improvements he made in
living conditions
STANDARDS TESTED
Standards: 1, 2, 3, and 5
Unit: 6
The Chart for Determining the Final Examination Score for the November 2008
Elementary-Level Social Studies Test, will be posted on the Department’s web
site http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa/ by noon of the second day of the
examination. Conversion charts provided for the previous administrations of
the Elementary-Level Social Studies Test must NOT be used to determine
students’ final scores for this administration.
Submitting Teacher Evaluations of the Test to the Department
Suggestions and feedback from teachers provide an important contribution to the test
development process. The Department provides an online evaluation form for State assessments. It contains spaces for teachers to respond to several specific questions and to make
suggestions. Instructions for completing the evaluation form are as follows:
1. Go to http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa/exameval.
2. Select the test title.
3. Complete the required demographic fields.
4. Complete each evaluation question and provide comments in the space provided.
5. Click the SUBMIT button at the bottom of the page to submit the completed form.
[48]